Author Description

Peer review processes in scholarly publishing are often hidden behind layers of opacity, leaving authors--and even reviewers--with many questions about the process. Open peer review is one way to improve the practice. It can shorten the time between manuscript submission and publication, hold reviewers accountable for their work, make more apparent the hidden labor of reviewing and editing, allow for collaborative discourse between authors and reviewers, and more. Even with these benefits, open peer review is not widely accepted or understood. Few academic librarians have experienced it, and each implementation can be different; anything open is highly nuanced and contextual. Ultimately, when we discuss "open," we must discuss the stories around it. What is the aim? What are the pitfalls? What are the gains? And are we trying to simply replicate a broken system instead of reinventing it?<br> <br> <br> <br> <i>Stories of Open: Opening Peer Review through Narrative Inquiry</i> examines the methods and processes of peer review, as well as the stories of those who have been through it. Eleven chapters are divided into three parts:<br> <br> <br> <br> * <b>Part 1: Orientation.</b> This section offers a conceptual frame for the book, providing details about narrative inquiry as a methodology and the author's worldview and research approach.<br> <br> * <b>Part 2: The Stories (The Story Middle).</b> What is the standard experience of peer review in our field? This section shares stories told from a variety of viewpoints and roles--author, editor, and referee--and explores how these roles interact, the tension between them, and the duality and sometimes multiplicity of roles experienced by any one individual.<br> <br> * <b>Part 3: Coda. </b>These four chapters tie the stories to the idea of open and look in detail at the research method, as well as imagine how we might move forward--reflecting on our past stories to create future ones.<br> <br> <br> <br> When we open ourselve